Tor

Tor is an encrypted anonymising network that makes it harder to intercept internet communications, or see where communications are coming from or going to.

In order to use the WikiLeaks public submission system as detailed above you can download the Tor Browser Bundle, which is a Firefox-like browser available for Windows, Mac OS X and GNU/Linux and pre-configured to connect using the anonymising system Tor.

Tails

If you are at high risk and you have the capacity to do so, you can also access the submission system through a secure operating system called Tails. Tails is an operating system launched from a USB stick or a DVD that aim to leaves no traces when the computer is shut down after use and automatically routes your internet traffic through Tor. Tails will require you to have either a USB stick or a DVD at least 4GB big and a laptop or desktop computer.

Tips

Our submission system works hard to preserve your anonymity, but we recommend you also take some of your own precautions. Please review these basic guidelines.

1. Contact us if you have specific problems

If you have a very large submission, or a submission with a complex format, or are a high-risk source, please contact us. In our experience it is always possible to find a custom solution for even the most seemingly difficult situations.

2. What computer to use

If the computer you are uploading from could subsequently be audited in an investigation, consider using a computer that is not easily tied to you. Technical users can also use Tails to help ensure you do not leave any records of your submission on the computer.

3. Do not talk about your submission to others

If you have any issues talk to WikiLeaks. We are the global experts in source protection – it is a complex field. Even those who mean well often do not have the experience or expertise to advise properly. This includes other media organisations.

After

1. Do not talk about your submission to others

If you have any issues talk to WikiLeaks. We are the global experts in source protection – it is a complex field. Even those who mean well often do not have the experience or expertise to advise properly. This includes other media organisations.

2. Act normal

If you are a high-risk source, avoid saying anything or doing anything after submitting which might promote suspicion. In particular, you should try to stick to your normal routine and behaviour.

3. Remove traces of your submission

If you are a high-risk source and the computer you prepared your submission on, or uploaded it from, could subsequently be audited in an investigation, we recommend that you format and dispose of the computer hard drive and any other storage media you used.

In particular, hard drives retain data after formatting which may be visible to a digital forensics team and flash media (USB sticks, memory cards and SSD drives) retain data even after a secure erasure. If you used flash media to store sensitive data, it is important to destroy the media.

If you do this and are a high-risk source you should make sure there are no traces of the clean-up, since such traces themselves may draw suspicion.

4. If you face legal action

If a legal action is brought against you as a result of your submission, there are organisations that may help you. The Courage Foundation is an international organisation dedicated to the protection of journalistic sources. You can find more details at https://www.couragefound.org.

Submit documents to WikiLeaks

WikiLeaks publishes documents of political or historical importance that are censored or otherwise suppressed. We specialise in strategic global publishing and large archives.

The following is the address of our secure site where you can anonymously upload your documents to WikiLeaks editors. You can only access this submissions system through Tor. (See our Tor tab for more information.) We also advise you to read our tips for sources before submitting.

wlupld3ptjvsgwqw.onion

Copy this address into your Tor browser. Advanced users, if they wish, can also add a further layer of encryption to their submission using our public PGP key.

If you cannot use Tor, or your submission is very large, or you have specific requirements, WikiLeaks provides several alternative methods. Contact us to discuss how to proceed.

Re: Can we chat about this?

Patrice is getting blown up about this and so is Luis. She can say this anymore.
- TP
On May 5, 2016, at 1:14 PM, Tracie Pough <PoughT@dnc.org<mailto:PoughT@dnc.org>> wrote:
I'm flagging for you because it could be an issue at exec for her. She needs to understand that she is still chair and be more careful with her comments until she's not. Also, it underscores the idea that she's been on the tank for Clinton all the while. She just needs to lay low on this until after she's done with her term as chair.
- TP
On May 5, 2016, at 1:06 PM, Banfill, Ryan <BanfillR@dnc.org<mailto:BanfillR@dnc.org>> wrote:
DWS said the caucuses are over so she expressed her feelings. She doesn't like Iowa doing theirs on a Tuesday. Prefers Saturday's.
Sent from my iPad
On May 5, 2016, at 10:05 AM, Tracie Pough <PoughT@dnc.org<mailto:PoughT@dnc.org>> wrote:
No but some of the DNC staff expressed concerns.
- TP
On May 5, 2016, at 1:02 PM, Banfill, Ryan <BanfillR@dnc.org<mailto:BanfillR@dnc.org>> wrote:
OK. Are you hearing grumbles?
Sent from my iPad
On May 5, 2016, at 9:58 AM, Tracie Pough <PoughT@dnc.org<mailto:PoughT@dnc.org>> wrote:
FYI. Some caucus state chair's may upset about this.
Subject: Can we chat about this?
Buzzfeed: The Democratic Party Chair Wants To Get Rid Of Caucuses<https://www.buzzfeed.com/evanmcsan/the-democratic-party-chair-wants-to-get-rid-of-caucuses?utm_term=.suVmzzlgM#.xfp2DDYne>
Debbie Wasserman Schultz sits down with No One Knows Anything, BuzzFeed’s politics podcast.
posted on May 5, 2016, at 11:54 a.m.
Evan McMorris-Santoro<https://www.buzzfeed.com/evanmcsan?language=en>
BuzzFeed News Reporter
Add Democratic Party chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz to the growing list of people frustrated by the convoluted and often poorly-run caucus process.
“I prefer primaries just because they’re simpler,” Wasserman Schultz said. “And because they are more democratic.”
“I can say that because I’m not going to be chair the next time, so now I am free to say what my own preference is,” she noted.
Wasserman Schultz sat for an interview with No One Knows Anything, the BuzzFeed News political podcast, Tuesday afternoon<x-apple-data-detectors://2> — hours before results came in that would reverberate through presidential politics. Donald Trump sewed up the Republican nomination for all intents and purposes, leaving Wasserman Schultz to speculate that Democrats could dramatically expand their map<https://www.buzzfeed.com/evanmcsan/dnc-chair-feels-the-trump> to compete in states like Georgia and Arizona in November.
On the Democratic side in Indiana, Bernie Sanders eked out a win over Hillary Clinton. Despite math showing winning the nomination outright to be all but impossible, Sanders vowed<http://www.cbsnews.com/videos/sanders-vows-to-stay-in-race-until-convention/> to stay in the race until the Democratic convention, meaning Wasserman Schultz is still presiding over a contested primary that has seen her trashed by Sanders supporters who see her DNC as an arm of the Clinton campaign.
That’s a charge Wasserman Schultz has vehemently denied. She’s run the party through a surprisingly contentious primary that has built a lot of bitterness among diehards on both sides. (But Sanders supporters have said for months<https://www.buzzfeed.com/evanmcsan/donald-trump-is-making-clintons-case-to-young-sanders-suppor?utm_term=.kej9zJNBB#.kej9zJNBB> a Trump nomination on the Republican side will keep them as activist Democrats — and as that reality sets in, a lot of people think even the Bern-feeling-est of the Bernie contingent will find themselves<http://www.vox.com/2016/5/4/11593434/bernie-sanders-poll-trump-clinton> pulling the lever for Hillary in November.)
Fueling some of the acrimony is the Democratic nominating process itself. The unexpectedly long primary showcased a system ill-equipped to handle the increased turnout brought by Sanders’ challenge to Clinton. Lines, delays, and errors were common at caucuses<https://www.buzzfeed.com/evanmcsan/why-is-anyone-still-doing-caucuses>. Differing primary rules state by state meant sometimes people who chose not to register as a member of the Democratic Party could vote in the Democratic primary. Sometimes they couldn’t.
Reflecting on a primary process near its end, Wasserman Schultz stressed that the Democratic National Committee has review processes in place that could result in changes to the way the nominating contest works in future elections. But she has her own opinion on how things should change — though they’re not “crusades” that she’s on, just opinions.
First, do away with caucuses, which she said can lead to “intimidation” due to rules that make a caucus-goer’s selection public. “You sort of obliterate the idea of a secret ballot in the caucus, because there are people gathering in a room, and they are pooling themselves around the room for who they are for,” Wasserman Schultz said, “and you know, maybe some people don’t want that to be public.”
Wasserman Schultz favors primaries. But she doesn’t favor the kind of open primaries Sanders supporters want.
“I think the Democratic Party and the Republican Party’s nominees should be chosen by members of our party,” she said. “It’s our job, once we have a nominee, to sell [independents] on our party’s candidate, but if you have chosen not to be a member of our party, then to me, you are not entitled and should not be entitled to help decide who our party’s nominee is.”
“That means you haven’t worked to build the party,” Wasserman Schultz said. (She added that this was also her opinion, and not something she was making a “crusade.”)
Finally, the superdelegates — the party officials and electeds who are given an automatic nominating vote by virtue of their position — should stay, Wasserman Schultz said.
She noted the system has been in place since 1984 and has never been used to actually decide the nomination. “You have party leaders and elected officials who have earned the right, because they helped build our party, because they represent our party, they’re the leaders and the voice, they deserve a role in the convention, too.”
Wasserman Schultz said she was able to speak more freely about her critiques of the process because she’ll be leaving the DNC chairwomanship soon. But the expectations that these things are going to change should be low.
“I’m not going to try to change [open primaries] — you couldn’t anyway,” she said. “Those are also decided at the state lev